Mayra Ponce v. Medical Eyeglass Center Inc et al

Filing 25

ORDER RE: JOINT STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE by Judge Christina A. Snyder: Upon Stipulation 24 , IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the action and all of the claims alleged therein be and hereby are dismissed with prejudice, in their entirety and as to all current and former defendants, pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 41(a)(1). The Court to retain jurisdiction to enforce the Parties' confidential settlement agreement. ( Case Terminated. Made JS-6. ) (gk)

Download PDF
1 TODD H. HARRISON, SBN 230542 2 3 4 5 6 JS-6 BRENNAN S. KAHN, SBN 259548 PERONA, LANGER, BECK, SERBIN, MENDOZA & HARRISON, APC. 300 East San Antonio Drive Long Beach, California 90807-0948 (562) 426-6155 Fax (562) 490-9823 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Mayra Ponce 7 8 UNITED STATED DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MAYRA PONCE, an Individual, Case Number: 2:15-cv-04035-CAS-JEM 12 (Assigned to Hon. Christina A. Snyder, U.S. District Judge, and Hon. John E. McDermott, Magistrate Judge, Courtroom 5, 2nd Floor (Los Angeles – Spring Street)) Plaintiff, 13 vs. 14 MEDICAL EYEGLASS CENTER, 15 INC., a New Jersey Corporation; and DOES 1 through 10, Inclusive, 16 17 Defendants. 18 [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: JOINT STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE Complaint Filed: Removed to Fed. Ct.: 19 April 16, 2015 May 28, 2015 20 21 22 Good cause appearing therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above- 23 captioned action and all of the claims alleged therein be and hereby are dismissed with 24 prejudice, in their entirety and as to all current and former defendants, pursuant to Federal 25 Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 41(a)(1). The Court to retain jurisdiction to enforce the 26 Parties’ confidential settlement agreement. 27 DATED: July 14, 2016 28 _____________________________ Hon. Christina A. Snyder, Judge 1 [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: JOINT STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL W/ PREJUDICE

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?